• 反いじめ戦隊@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    2 days ago

    Did we read the same praxis?

    What problems are there in “everyone should be armed, and money is theft?”

    Guns are not the only deterrent to intolerance, btw. We bolt cutters too.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      What problems are there in: “Everyone should be armed! Money is theft!”?

      Innumerable.

      • Agosagror@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        Anarchism doesn’t really have a great answer to that question, and frankly I really dont think it needs one. It’s reckons that people who understand the freedoms they have will fight to maintain them, and it understands those ideas within the context of now, rather than trying to thread a shakey narrative through all of history. If you want men from 100 years ago to answer all your questions today then Marxism is probably closer to what you want

        Doubtless you can find Anarchist arguing about that question, its a good question. But at its core Anarchism is a more of a philosophy rather than an ideology. Its a collection of tools that one can employ to solve problems and win concessions from authority.

        That said if you want to see some of said argument, The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow gives some nice answers. And does so whilst trying to build on the up to date evidence about what life was like that long ago.

        • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Ah makes sense, thank you for that great answer (:

          So in the root it relies on a belief that “good” people are in the majority and that our current structure gives an outsized amount of power to “bad” people?

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Yes, but it’s not like we spent the last 200 years hoping for that to happen on its own. In the very beginning the idea was “let’s assassinate the king the rest will sort itself”, nope, it doesn’t, the king is in people’s heads.

            A word you’ll hear used quite often nowadays in theoretical Anarchist circles is “prefiguration”, building the new in the shell of the old, in particular building horizontal modes of organisation. When you see something being organised hierarchically, say, a workplace, and you have an idea on how to organise it horizontally (e.g. a cooperative), then do so. And be good at it.

            The idea is that thus, hierarchical realism can be fought: That idea that people have in their head that to organise something, someone has to be in charge, call the shots, order people around, be able to exert authority over others, force others. The more people are part of those kinds of structures, the more obvious it will become that horizontal modes of organisation are also possible on larger levels, and people will work towards creating those. The avalanche needs to be built from the bottom up, as weird as that sounds.

            In short: I can’t tell you what’s over the horizon, but I can give you a compass and say “Here, that direction, doesn’t that look promising? Let’s take a first step!”.

            …and meta side-note we’re on lemmy. As everyone can just spin up their own instance (or happily join an instance with admins who admin instead of try to rule over their users) and the instances interact horizontally it’s quite anarchic in principle. Evidently, it also works. That it was written by tankies is just extra irony on top, showing how little they understand their pet enemy.

          • TronBronson@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yea it basically requires that you are either a bad actor pretending this is true, or a basement dweller who choses to believe this is true. They have no idea the kind of assholes you meet traversing society, or they are the assholes. The 5 million people in Manhattan are just not going to live peacefully without law and order. Be fun to watch tho.

      • khaleer@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        From inaction and popular belief that they can give people safety. People gave the “defense” job to kings and goverments with belief that they could focus on other stuff, not realizing they are giving up their freedom. Soon, kings and gov start to violate people all around.

        • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          And what’s stopping another group from using oppression to get the monopoly on power again once anarchy is introduced?

            • Thekingoflorda@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 days ago

              Well, would you mind telling what I should read to understand it better? The first link you send I did read, the second has thousands of files, so I didn’t know where to start.

              • 反いじめ戦隊@ani.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                2 days ago

                All of it. Until you fully comprehend that when everyone’s equipped with anti-oppression tools, nobody can, or should be oppressed.

                @PugJesus@lemmy.world ’s meme is neoliberalism at its finest, sending bombs to Gaza, and slavering Africans. What “Freedom” is there, when they oppress other nations, and their civilians, through theft?

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Rhetorics are praxis, yours are shit. Be less angry. Project less of your pain on random passers-by. Assume innocence. If you can’t, work on it until you can. If you don’t understand why that’s the case, why it’s a bad idea to preach from on-high as an Anarchist…

                  • 反いじめ戦隊@ani.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    So, do you read book covers for the pretty fonts, or do read and conceptualize the contents of a news article with a journal to take notes with at the next post?

            • Valmond@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Well, can you point us to an example where anarchy effectively worked? With more than a thousand people?

              It just doesn’t seem to function, and you just don’t want to try to figure out why and fix it.

              That’s the problem IMO with anarchists (like you).

              • 反いじめ戦隊@ani.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                Sure! Plenty of examples, both alive, and in the past.

                It’s just extremely saddening when statists forgo teaching basic anarchist praxis, and prefer to indoctrinate statist homogeneity.

                Why does oppression function so well then, that freedom means now oppression of others, and you seem content on maintaining that contradiction? Since when was freedom justified in the oppression of others?

                My problem is I don’t like oppression, but you do!